What does Live 14 need to do to compete with 2K?

[thedream2k13]

Re: What does Live 14 need to do to compete with 2K?

Unfortunately thats not where the money is. Casual fans could care less if it plays like real basketball. If it is fun and easy to play, you will get more sales and press than if it is difficult but realistic. It will appeal greatly to everyone on this website but the average Live/2k gamer could care less or be turned away by it.

then they dont like basketball. The average 2k gamer will have to learn the game and play i like the sees on television. if its to hard for them to use a brain when playing then trade it in for a new game

[blad3runner]

Re: What does Live 14 need to do to compete with 2K?

It needs to stop catering to the casual basketball crowd.

It really needs to be more SIM. Do the great things 2k does and improve on the weaknesses of 2K.

I honestly don't see this happening. LIVE has never ever been sim, why would it start now?

[sirjam]

Re: What does Live 14 need to do to compete with 2K?

Just make the 5 on 5 gameplay solid and they will be fine. I'll get more in depth if you boys really real enough. lol

[dwanestar]

Re: What does Live 14 need to do to compete with 2K?

First of all..Live allways had it all...we just 4got cus they left it hanging..
all they need to do is to pick up were they left the succes hanging..with that being said...from nba live 10 its a big gap to overcome.. they got to focus on nba live only let 2k do their thing ...nba live do you..

[Matayeus]

Re: What does Live 14 need to do to compete with 2K?

Honestly , put out a solid crew/club mode with good , fun 5v5 gameplay.

They could definitely steal away some angry 2k fans that way

[KyotoCarl]

First of all..Live allways had it all...we just 4got cus they left it hanging..
all they need to do is to pick up were they left the succes hanging..with that being said...from nba live 10 its a big gap to overcome.. they got to focus on nba live only let 2k do their thing ...nba live do you..

There were plenty of bad things too. Live 10 was good but a lot of the 2000's Live's were very arcadey.

Sent using Tap a Talk

[LingeringRegime]

Re: What does Live 14 need to do to compete with 2K?

I really liked Live 10, but not much else Live had to offer this gen.

I remember being so excited to play Live 07 (T-Mac on Cover) when I got my second 360. Then my eyes were treated to a blinding frame rate abomination. That was the worst sports game this generation not even a contest.

[k1lo5]

Re: What does Live 14 need to do to compete with 2K?

1. Release (gotta be in it to win it)
2. Show us some 5 on 5 footage
3. Show us more info of features coming out

I too really liked Live 10, especially being able to play with my national team, 'Australian Boomers'. Really hoping they keep the Fiba feature going.

[Sundown]

Re: What does Live 14 need to do to compete with 2K?

Live 14 can compete with 2k if they deliver a simulation game. Presentation wise they are on par with 2k because of the ESPN integration. If the live ball works, the dribbling will be lightyears ahead of 2k's. The real-time physics that comes with the Ignite Engine is already better than 2k, unless 2k has secretly built a new engine (which is hard to believe considering that they haven't improved many gameplay issues since 2k10).

In my opinion, Live 14 will compete as long as it doesn't completely strike out, and I dont see that happening because everything sounds so good so far. We haven't had a really great basketball game since 2k9 (totally subjective as far as preference, but true as far as simulation goes).

2K9 was the worst of the series as far as I can remember. Getting 3 pointers blocked regularly and zero momentum. Ugh.

And there's no proof that Ignite is implemented in a way that actually produces better gameplay than 2K. It's been buzzwords from EA for years now. In fact it was a buzz word that killed the Live series for 4 years.

[thedream2k13]

Re: What does Live 14 need to do to compete with 2K?

hope that presentation rivals fifa 14!

[quehouston]

2K9 was the worst of the series as far as I can remember. Getting 3 pointers blocked regularly and zero momentum. Ugh.

And there's no proof that Ignite is implemented in a way that actually produces better gameplay than 2K. It's been buzzwords from EA for years now. In fact it was a buzz word that killed the Live series for 4 years.

Ignite is definitely not a buzzword, its an engine.

Buzzwords are "Authenticity"..."Never seen before."...things like that.

And 2k13's jumpshot block is faaaaaaarrrr worse than 2k9's. Sheesh, dont even get me started on 2k13's closeout speeds...

[Sundown]

Ignite is definitely not a buzzword, its an engine.

Buzzwords are "Authenticity"..."Never seen before."...things like that.

And 2k13's jumpshot block is faaaaaaarrrr worse than 2k9's. Sheesh, dont even get me started on 2k13's closeout speeds...

It's an engine given a buzzword name. Fine, it's a "buzz name", but Live hasn't shown it can produce no matter what name or gimmicky engine they use. And it was precisely their pursuit of gimmicks that killed the franchise.

Yes, close outs are bad especially online. But was talking actual perimeter blocks. 9's CPU blocking was ridiculous.

[quehouston]

It's an engine given a buzzword name. Fine, it's a "buzz name", but Live hasn't shown it can produce no matter what name or gimmicky engine they use. And it was precisely their pursuit of gimmicks that killed the franchise.

Yes, close outs are bad especially online. But was talking actual perimeter blocks. 9's CPU blocking was ridiculous.

Is EA not entitled to name its engine whatever it wants?

And we all know Live stunk it up on current gen. I'm an unbiased basketball gamer, trust me, i know live was horrible. But we are talking about a totally new generation here. I could understand if live was trying to make a comeback on PS3/360. Then of course we could crucify them, and judge on their past installments on current gen. But we are talking about a totally new system, new engine. I just wish we as gamers could look to the future instead of judging a next gen game off of its last gen failures.

And as for blocked jumpshots..***n a play, get a man open lol

[Sundown]

Is EA not entitled to name its engine whatever it wants?

And we all know Live stunk it up on current gen. I'm an unbiased basketball gamer, trust me, i know live was horrible. But we are talking about a totally new generation here. I could understand if live was trying to make a comeback on PS3/360. Then of course we could crucify them, and judge on their past installments on current gen. But we are talking about a totally new system, new engine. I just wish we as gamers could look to the future instead of judging a next gen game off of its last gen failures.

And as for blocked jumpshots..***n a play, get a man open lol

Blocked 3's just don't happen much even when contested. 2k9 also had terrible physics.

Anyway, yes, EA can name things whatever they want, but they have several strikes against them even trying to put a product together. Just because an engine is new doesn't mean it's better or mature. It's precisely because they've started from scratch several times and had nothing to show for it that I'm not giving them a free pass.

Basketball is an extremely difficult sport to simulate and I doubt they can put out anything it's even remotely comparable to 2K in one dev cycle.

A new console doesn't magically make development easier or games better. It actually makes certain things more difficult as the standards are much higher and there's new technology to learn. The fact that EA couldn't put out a playable game on old, well understood tech gives me even less optimism that they can put something good out on next-gen on launch.

So bad track record, lack of experience, lack of development time isn't trumped by "new" and neato-engine-naming to me. The PS4 and Xbox One won't save them. Only their development chops will, and so far, they haven't shown much.

[quehouston]

Blocked 3's just don't happen much even when contested. 2k9 also had terrible physics.

Anyway, yes, EA can name things whatever they want, but yet have several strikes against them even trying to put a product together. Just because an engine is new doesn't mean it's better or mature. It's precisely because they've started from scratch several times and had nothing to show for it that I'm not giving them a free pass.

Basketball is an extremely difficult sport to simulate and I doubt they can put out anything it's even remotely comparable to 2K in one dev cycle.

A new console doesn't magically make development easier or games better. It actually makes certain things more difficult as the standards are much higher and there's new technology to learn. The fact that EA couldn't put out a playable game on old, well understood tech gives me even less optimism that they can put something good out on next-gen on launch.

So bad track record, lack of experience, lack of development time isn't trumped by "new" and neato-engine-naming to me. The PS4 and Xbox One won't save them. Only their development chops will, and so far, they haven't shown much.

2k13 has NO PHYSICS, like...AT ALL. But anyways...

But, to each his own man. Agree to disagree. Live has a new engine, lets just hope 2k gets a new one too, because their current one is really outdated. Guess we will just have to see, boss.